General principles

The General Principles subtopic provides an introduction to the basic concepts that underpin cross-border and offshore planning. It also provides an overview of the other International subtopics, which provide more detailed guidance on specific concepts (eg residence and domicile), investment vehicles (eg offshore trusts and companies) and measures intended to tackle offshore tax avoidance and evasion.

Private international law (conflict of laws)

In the global economy, individuals are becoming increasingly mobile. Conflicts of law may arise when an individual has a connection with more than one jurisdiction. A connecting factor may be residence, habitual residence, domicile, or citizenship depending on the law of the specific jurisdiction. Even where individuals and their personal representatives or trustees are based in one jurisdiction, they often own assets in another jurisdiction. As a result it is often necessary to consider private international law when advising on cross-border tax and estate planning to resolve conflicts between the laws of different jurisdictions. For information on the principles of private international law, see Practice Note: Private client and private international law—summary of main principles.

For guidance on cross-border issues relating to Wills and succession,

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Private Client News

Market value, distributions and notional transactions—key SDLT lessons from Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC

Tax analysis: In Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC, the Court of Appeal considered the basis on which stamp duty land tax (SDLT) should be assessed and whether that resulted in SDLT being paid on the market value, the actual consideration paid, or on some other basis for a complex transaction within a corporate group. The taxpayer argued that the ‘Case 3’ exception under section 54(4) of the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003) applied, which would result in SDLT being charged on the actual consideration. HMRC argued that the exception did not apply, which would result in SDLT being paid on the market value of the property. Alternatively, HMRC argued that if the exception did apply then the anti-avoidance provisions at FA 2003, s 75A applied, potentially resulting in an even higher SDLT charge. The Court of Appeal held that although the Case 3 exception applied, the anti-avoidance provision in FA 2003, s 75A also applied. This resulted in SDLT being assessed on an aggregate amount that was even higher than the property's market value (although HMRC did not seek to increase its assessment beyond market value). Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. As explained by Jon Stevens, partner, and Rory Clarke, solicitor, at DWF Law LLP, this decision deals with the interaction of a number of complex SDLT provisions and clarifies the SDLT provisions relating to transfers to connected companies and the SDLT anti-avoidance provisions, with implications for corporate structuring and tax planning.

View Private Client by content type :

Popular documents